Tag: 1987 Constitution

Ping: Utang ng sundalo sa sambayanan ang tinatamasa nila

Sa sambayanan may utang ang mga sundalo sa mga biyayang tinatamasa ng mga ito kapalit ng pagiging tapat sa Saligang Batas at tamang pagtupad sa mga tungkulin na nakaatang sa kanilang balikat.

Ito ang binigyang-diin ni Senador at dating Philippine National Police (PNP) Chief Panfilo Lacson bilang pagpapaalala na produkto ng sama-samang pagtatrabaho ng mga mambabatas ang mga batas na nalilikha para sa kapakinabangan ng iba’t-ibang sangay ng pamahalaan kabilang na ang sandatahang lakas.

Ayon pa kay Lacson, maliwanag na naman umano na ang mga senador ay halal ng taumbayan kaya lumalabas na ikinakatawan lamang ng mga ito ang sambayanan sa sa paghinang ng mga batas.

Related:Β Lacson: AFP owes allegiance to Filipino people
Continue reading “Ping: Utang ng sundalo sa sambayanan ang tinatamasa nila”

Lacson, May Mala-Pederalismo na Panukala na Walang Cha-Cha

Hindi man matuloy ang Charter Change, siguradong makakamit pa rin ang mithiin na isinusulong ng Duterte administration sa ilalim ng pederalismo, sa pamamagitan ng panukala ni Senador Panfilo Lacson.

Nakapaloob na kasi sa Senate Bill 40 na tinaguriang Budget Reform Advocacy for Village Empowerment (BRAVE) at isinulong ni Lacson kasabay ng pagbukas ng kasalukuyang Kongreso ang halos lahat ng mithiin ng pederalismo.

πŸ”ˆPakinggan ang paliwanag ni Sen. Lacson sa BRAVE

Pangunahing nilalaman ng BRAVE bill ni Lacson ang direktang pagbibigay ng pondo sa mga lokal na pamahalaan upang mapondohan ng mga ito ang mga proyektong kailangan nila base sa personal na obserbasyon sa mga nasasakupan.

Related:Β Lacson: BRAVE to meet federalism goals without need to amend the Constitution

Continue reading “Lacson, May Mala-Pederalismo na Panukala na Walang Cha-Cha”

On the House Pushing Through with Amending the Constitution Without the Senate

For their own sake, they should not allow themselves to look pathetic and worse, ridiculous. Having said that, they should read the 1987 Constitution in its entirety, or at the very least, Art XVII, Sec. 1 (Amendments or Revisions) in relation to Art VI Sec. 1 (Legislative Department) that explicitly refers to “the Congress” as the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Interpreting β€œthe Congress” under Art XVII to refer to one chamber only is at best, self-serving. They pride themselves as lawyers in good standing but it only takes a layman who knows how to read and understand simple words and literature in order to appreciate what is right and wrong.

As for questioning the House’s move before the Supreme Court, there is need, and we will not. They can propose amendments or revision all they want but at the end of the day, a plebiscite would necessitate an item in the General Appropriations Act to be appropriated for the Commission on Elections to conduct such plebiscite.

Without the Senate, how can such appropriation materialize?

*****

Lacson: BRAVE to Meet Federalism Goals Without Need to Amend the Constitution

The goals of federalism can still be met without the need to spend much time and resources to amend or revise the 1987 Constitution, if Sen. Panfilo M. Lacson’s Budget Reform Advocacy for Village Empowerment (BRAVE) bill is passed into law.

Lacson said the BRAVE bill, which is similar to federalism as it empowers local government units by giving them funding for their development projects, even gained the support of Cabinet Secretary Leoncio Evasco Jr.

β€œParang federalism yan dahil ibababa ang karamihan ng pondo o malaking bahagi ng pondo ng national government, ilalatag papunta sa kanayunan sa probinsya nang sa ganoon matuto sila mag-develop on their own,” Lacson said in an interview on DZBB on Sunday.

πŸ”ˆListen to Sen. Lacson’s explanation of BRAVE

“Kung ito halimbawa ma-approve sa House of Representatives at Senado at ma-bicameral, ma-approve ito maging batas, masasabatas ang pagkalat ng pondo sa mga probinsya,” he added.

Related:Β Lacson may mala-pederalismo na panukala na walang Cha-Cha

Continue reading “Lacson: BRAVE to Meet Federalism Goals Without Need to Amend the Constitution”